Sunday, August 10, 2008

Nadir Ahmed vs. James White: "Can We Trust What the New Testament Tells Us about Jesus and the Gospel?"

If you thought that Nadir Ahmed's career ended after his humiliating defeat at the hands of Sam Shamoun, you're wrong. Nadir, in an effort to redeem himself, travelled to Phoenix, entered James White's church, and challenged him to a debate. While James didn't want to debate someone with absolutely no credentials, no standing in the Muslim community, and no respect from either Christians or Muslims, Nadir had crossed the line. Hence, one of Christianity's most experienced apologists agreed to debate one of Islam's most embarrassing characters. However, even those who know about Nadir couldn't have predicted how low he would sink in this debate. By the time the Q&A period rolled around, Nadir's fellow Muslims couldn't contain their embarrassment.

Interestingly, Nadir has defended his atrocious behavior here. It seems that sticking to a topic, respecting one's audience, not making a fool of oneself, etc., are Western values, which, according to Nadir, have no place in Islam.

(Note: For those who want to know what Nadir is talking about when he says that he heard from someone that Nabeel had accused him of practicing Muta, I happen to know where this misunderstanding came from. A couple of years ago, Nadir somehow managed to convince Nabeel's parents that he is a respected scholar of Islam. Nabeel, however, knew the truth: that Nadir knows virtually nothing about Islam and that some of his fellow Muslims think he is insane. In order to show his mother that Nadir is not respected, Nabeel pointed to an article on the Answering Christianity website which said that Nadir claims that sex with animals is acceptable in Islam. The only point was to show that people in the Muslim community have no respect for Nadir. Somehow, over the following months, Nabeel's mother confused the issue of sex with animals with the problem of Muta--Muhammad's [later retracted] claim that prostitution is acceptable, provided the men marry the women for the duration of their sexual activities. Nabeel's mom conveyed this misunderstanding to Nadir, who, instead of talking to Nabeel about the issue, chose instead to bring it up in the middle of his first debate with a Christian scholar--a debate on the reliability of the New Testament. Such behavior is, of course, utterly unacceptable, and Muslims are almost universally turning their backs on Nadir. Others are wondering why Nadir gets so emotional when the Muta issue is raised. After all, Nadir seems pleased when people accuse him of being demon possessed or mentally unstable. He wears such attacks as a badge of honor. Yet when someone is misunderstood as accusing him of practicing Muta, Nadir goes berserk. As Hamlet's mother would say, "The [man] doth protest too much, methinks." Anyway, if you thought that two humiliating defeats would finally convince Nadir that he needs to stop embarrassing himself and his religion, you're wrong again. Nadir is once again trying to make a comeback. He'll be doing two debates with Pastor Daniel Scot in September. Oh boy . . .)

45 comments:

Nadir is a USDA Grade a NUT. I have chatted with him a few times on paltalk. This guy needs to take his meds. It wouldnt surpise me to find this guy wearing a tin foil helmet or someday strapping on a few pounds of C4.

Hmmm I personally do not know Nadir and so could not possibly comment upon either his sanity nor his general methodology (having only heard two of his debates).

However what I will say is that, as soon as I heard he was willing to debate Sam Shamoun, I became a little concerned for his sincerity. However he claims that it was for similar reasons to Shabir's reasons for debating Dave Hunt.

I will actually acknowledge Sam Shamoun did win over Nadir in that Debate, but I believe more people should have spoken out against George Saieg's poor etiquette at the end in trying to resurrect a debate in the closing speech.

Is Nadir still debating on 9:11 as Ministry to Muslims announced at the end of the last debate?

If you're not familiar with Nadir, you don't know what you're missing! He claims to be the only Muslim debater in America. He also says that Shabir Ally is a "dummy" and that debating him is like debating "someone's grandma." I find this absolutely shocking. Shabir always gives his opponents a run for their money, and Nadir, lately, has done nothing but embarrass himself. He's also the only Muslim I've ever met that I just can't manage to get along with.

I'm not quite sure what to say in response to this... I think in the future Nadir should bring a mirror to his debates and just talk into it for everyone's entertainment, since he couldn't seem to register anything James was saying and seems to think that increasing the bombast of a baseless assertion somehow makes it an argument.

Personally I hope that he sticks around since he makes our job that much easier!

David, I have to admit that I am a bit dismayed by the venom and hatred you have towards me. You need to help me out here David... I think I made it clear that I am sponsored by Islamic Center of Peoria:

http://www.islamiccenterofpeoria.org/openletter.asp

what I do not understand... is that out Imam also made it clear that if anyone has any concerns about me then they should direct it to the Mosque board and they will arrange a meeting to address whatever concerns you or any others may have, yet... no one has come forward. Why is this? Why do people hide behind message boards? This is not the honorable way to handle matters. If what you are saying about me is reallly true.. then I will contact our Imam and we can set up a meeting..

And guess what!! You are in luck David - because this weekend we are having an Imam conference where I will be making a presentation on ExamineTheTruth.com debates and many of supporters of the website will be there... Now keep in mind, David made the following claim:

"While James didn't want to debate someone with absolutely no credentials, no standing in the Muslim community..."

So here is what I can do for you - I can arrange a conference call where you can address youre concerns to the general body..ok? And we will find out who is truthful.

As for this coward James White... you will find that I don't kiss his @#$2 like Shabir Ally. Actually, there are a lot of people who do that... but I won't mention anymore names.

James White was *exposed* for the fraud which he is when he ran away from the archaelogical, prophetic and scientific evidence for Islam.

And as for your poor attempt to defend James White's flight... saying well, Nadir is just not represented enough(or something like that).. well.. I think you should read this:

http://www.islamiccenterofpeoria.org/extruth.asp

And of course... no one is going to buy such silly excuses. So it is clear.. these Christian charlatans like White know the truth of Islam.. and their deception was exposed in that debate...

As for Nabeel.. and the Christian chanting:

"Nadir broke etiquette and decorum.. you Muslims should be soooooo embarrassed!!! Get rid of him now before he does anymore damage... :)"

I could care less. Because I have a job to do - and that is create dawa tools. By confronting Nabeel... and exposing his deception...because that will help shake loose the false faith in the New Testament of the average person in the pew.

When people see such low under-handed behavior coming from spiritual leaders... it raises a lot of disturbing questions in their minds ... and it shows them a side of Christians they have never seen before...

So.. the take home message of this debate, Christians scholars are afraid of something about Islamic evidences and even worse - they have to resort to such low behavior ...

So.. this debate is a multi prong attack against a Christians faith in the New Testament.. a very powerful tool indeed. And of course, last but not least.. the most important fact is that the New Testament was proved to be a book of 100% blind faith...

Does anyone see the irony here? I've made comments about Nadir's public debate, which is surely a matter for public discussion. Yet he has sent me his cell phone number, as if I'm only supposed to discuss his public performance in a private discussion with him and his Muslim friends.

But think about what Nadir did in his debate with James White. Surely, if Nadir has something to say to Nabeel, he should have said it in private. And yet Nadir made the issue public--in the middle of a debate no less!

Now let's review Nadir's position. If Nadir makes a fool of himself in public, I must not address the matter publicly. But if Nadir thinks Nabeel has said something in private, the appropriate place to raise the issue is in public.

Does anyone understand how Nadir's mind works? It's as if his neurons aren't connected in the same way as anyone else's.

Ben Malik, you can find his number and email address on the link which I provided:

http://www.islamiccenterofpeoria.org/openletter.asp

And some more bad news Ben. After you get done talking to Shaikh Amr... I will have a list of more Mosques you will need to contact. And if you like Ben.. you can call in on a conference call for my presentation this weekend.. I would like to get your views for everyone to listen to.

And... dont forget about the upcoming debate... I will go in detail on how Islam came to CONFRONT and CONDEMN the genocide and terrorism of Biblical Christianity.

Let's review, Nadir. You had twenty minutes to give an opening statement. You rambled for about seven and then sat down.

Later in this debate on the reliability of the New Testament, you started defending yourself against charges of Muta--charges that Nabeel never raised against you.

And now you say that this was somehow meant to destroy people's belief in the New Testament. Well, let's just say you failed more miserably than anyone has ever failed at anything--ever. How many Christians are shook up about their faith because you started rambling about Muta in the middle of a debate? Don't you realize that Christians left that room laughing at you, and that Muslims were complaining that they were so poorly represented (just as the Muslims in California were complaining that you had poorly represented Islam in your debate with Sam)?

And you think that James is somehow obligated to debate you again? Nadir, James gets debate invitations all the time. It was amazing that he agreed to debate you in the first place, considering that no one, Christian or Muslim, takes you seriously. But on top of this, in the middle of your debate, you took "Off Topic" to a whole new level and started talking about charges of prostitution!!!

Nadir, you're getting a chance to debate in September--not because anyone wants to hear you debate, but because ACP agreed to it nearly a year ago. I'll be surprised if Muslims don't boycott the event. Once these debates are over, so is your career. You will never, ever have another chance to debate a Christian scholar, because every Christian scholar will see that you don't obey even the most basic rules of decency.

But if I can help you continue debating, I'll certainly do it. You're one of Christianity's greatest assets.

Perhaps you know Nadir more than I do and hence are in situation in which you know how to answer him on a level which suits the way he acts around you. However I would say it seems a little harsh, I'm not excusing Nadir's incident in the James White Debate, but I think we need to be equally harsh when the offense is comitted on our own turf. For Example, Nabeel's rude outburst in which he mocked a fake Arab accent, which was completely unwarranted. Also the behaviour of Sam Shamoun in most debates.

No one has rebuked Nabeel more harshly than I have. But at the end of the day, it was only one mistake--a poor attempt at humor. Have you visited Nadir's website? And Sam can testify that I always point out when he's out of line, just as my Christian brothers tell me when I'm out of line.

You've said (1) that you don't really know Nadir, and (2) that I'm being a little harsh. Notice that no one who knows Nadir (Christian or Muslim) says I'm being too harsh. Do you know what Nadir did after his debate with James? He ran around the room pointing his finger at people and loudly calling James a coward. When Nadir disagrees with someone, it's only a matter of time before he calls them a "pedophile" or something else.

Hence, I think I'm hardly being too harsh when I tell him that he made a fool of himself. As a matter of fact, he did make a fool of himself. I'm not making any false accusations here. I'll simply add that, if he were a Christian, I would be far, far more harsh with him. It's strange, then, that Muslims aren't more vocal in their disapproval.

Yahya, a.k.a., the cowardly Shia, speaks. I know Shamoun is your nightmare but you need to stop lying since you are not talking to Shias who will allow you to get away with it.

Since you say most debates please document here the debates where Shamoun has conducted himself in a less than ideal fashion. I am calling your bluff like I did last time since I enjoy exposing liars and connivers who are being good Muslims.

You cannot trust what Yahya says since he has perfected the art of lying as a good Shia. Here, he makes it sound as if he doesn't really know whether Nadir is as bad you say, but in another post the cowardly Shia said this:

Let Nadir Ahmed and this guy continue their exchanges, I think they are on a level together.

He said this in reference to Shamoun. So if Nadir is on Shamoun's level, and since we all know what the Cowardly Shia's view of Shamoun, then this means that Nadir is a very low-level character, which means that Yahya basically agrees with your assessment, David.

See, he can't even keep up with his own lies since he is simply interested in discrediting the guy he fears more than his own pagan idol whom he worships as God, Shamoun, and so doesn't mind abrogating himself in perfect imitation of his nonexistent God.

And isn't it funny that Yahya begins many of his posts with the words hmmm? He sounds like a cartoon character and his posts read like a comic strip. He even has a picutre which looks like it came out of comic book! Coincidence? I think not. :-)

I'm glad you show a degree of moral consistancy when it comes to calling out those who show extremely bad etiquette both in the Christian World and in the Muslim World. I think that one should never be hell bent on proving their case to the extent of compromising on their own moral values.

I am extremely happy with both your conduct as well as the conduct of Dr. White when it comes to your etiquette in debates.

As for Ben Malik a.k.a Sam Shamoun,It's ironic that we don't even need to inform David as to occasions in which you have demonstrated your incapability to act either candidly nor in a civil manner hence it is worthless entering any real discussion with you.

As for me knowing Nadir Ahmed, as I've said I've watched two of his debates, the first actually gave me a good impression of Shamoun (which even caused me to email Shamoun to congratulate him on his performance), however ever since I have witnessed Shamoun's true behaviour which I honestly believe is indicative of dishonesty and genuine scorn towards anyone challenging Christianity.

Notice his Christianly attempt of showing love to his neighbour here:

first he refers to my God as a Pagan Idol and secondly makes a mockery of my physical appearance, I honestly am not surprised.... I just hope some Christians have the sense to speak out against his foul behaviour.

I could have easily commented upon Shamoun's appearance but have chosen not too.

Instead of appealing to emotions and poisoning the well why not back up your assertions and lies for a change? I can't accuse you of being a bad Muslim when you lie and slander people since Islam teaches you to do this.

Do I have to go through the entire site to document how you started attacking Shamoun and also myself? I would love to do so since I won't hesitate to provide further documentation that you are a liar.

Secondly, did you bother reading the following link which I posted to prove that it was your Muslim cronies who started up with insults, the blasphemies, and the attacks on Shamoun and others?

http://www.answering-islam.org/Responses/Osama/zawadi_puberty3.htm

Now, instead of whining and appealing to emotions can you please for the love of your martyr Husayn document your accusations for a change? Please shock me and stand up for your religion and prove your case for once.

It matters not whether or not I'm appealing to emotions, I'm not engaging in a debate with you here... I'm commenting on your general etiquette, and since you have demonstrated your unwillingness to enter into Debate in a candid or civil manner then there is really no point furthering this discussion with you. Go on throw in another insult should you so choose to do so, because it's really what you are best at from what I have observed.

As for the link, well I can't really disprove what you have said and I don't know Sami Zaatari personally, I've heard he has made many mistakes in the past though, so perhaps the link you have provided does document actual sayings of their's, Allahu Alim. However it doesn't justify any insult from you about me, just because Muslims show poor behaviour doesn't require you to act similarly if not worse.

As for your debates, anyone who visits Paltalk should be familiar with your conduct. However your comment on my physical appearance and constant derogatory references to the God of the Qur'an all serve as information which can only reiterate your true colours.

Please do document where I have slandered Shamoun and I shall apologise for any slander I have done, since I do not believe in compromising on my own morality.

Thirdly don't attempt to start a debate with me yet again, I can only repeat myself in hopes of you one day learning that I do not debate with people who show no real concern for factual information nor an integrity for moral behaviour and decency.

I do appreciate your tone here and only wished you had expressed yourself to me in a similar manner from the very start. If you recall, you started attacking me and Shamoun when I engaged Bassam, which you had no right to do.

Anyway, the past is past and I will try to move forward by refraining from making direct comments concerning your person, provided you reciprocate.

AllI have heard a recording of Nadir's IMAN throwing him under the bus. Someone did call his Mosq and spoke with the Head Iman in which he completley denied any support for him. He said words to the effect "Nadir does things on his own, he does not have any connection with this mosq." (I'm quoting from memory so this might not be a exact quote.)

I know this recording exists, it can be produced if needed. The recording was made with out the callers knowlege. Parts of it are even on a youtube video that Nadir made.

As someone who has a child that suffers from ADD I recognize the signs of it in Nadir. He really does need to take medication. Any muslim or christian who supports this guy debating is only enabling a mentaly ill person in his own psychosis. Nadir may I sugjest you ask your Dr. about FOCALIN. It worked wonders for my child. I'm not saying this to be meen. Well maybe I am just a little. But really man you need definite medical help.

In hour 1:20 in the debate, Nadir Ahmed raised a very important and good point that I believe have indeed silenced Dr. James White, and that is:

How come the Christian historical writers and documentations do not record THIS MONUMENTAL AND MIRACULOUS event of 100s of deads supposedly resurrecting and living among the people in Palestine when Jesus was crucified? Why is history VIRTUALLY SILENT about this event if it wasn't indeed false?

Now aside from the laughable and ridiculous things that Nadir Ahmed had said, I believe that he did raise some very good points in this debate.

Now everyone knows how much I stood against Nadir Ahmed in public, and even David Wood has a link of my article that exposes Nadir Ahmed's ridiculous behaviour, but nonetheless, the credit has to be given to where it is due, and Nadir Ahmed did indeed raise an important point THAT IS FAR DEEPER THAN WHAT PEOPLE TAKE IT, and here is why:

1- Suppose that you say that this was a symbolic sentence from the Bible, that no zombies or dead resurrected, as Nadir Ahmed pointed out some renowned Christian scholars who COMPLETELY REJECT THIS STORY FROM THE BIBLE, then under what objective ground and on what basis should you now not consider other verses that deal with the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus as to not being symbolic as well?

2- If this is indeed a fabrication, as again, many Christian scholars reject it, then how could you honestly and sincerely trust anything from the Bible's accounts? AGAIN, KEEP IN MIND THAT THIS IS A GREAT EVENT, and not just some mere isolated quote or little story.

********************This is an event that should've made HEADLINES IN ALL OF THE HISTORY BOOKS IN THE ENTIRE MIDDLE EAST, because it was supposedly witnessed by all people (Romans, Jews and Palestinians)***********************

How come this event is not documented anywhere in the history books and/or ancient historical records?

Having viewed Nadir Ahmed's performance on the debates I consider that his understanding of the process is inadequate. He has not engaged in the scholarship required for this dialogue. I do not think it is reasonable for him to be invited to debate in the public arena. He does not represent the Islamic views adequately. In addition, he does not show respect for Christian viewpoints.

In short his knowldege base is at best second rate. Please do not give him oxygen by inviting him to participate in public forums.

OK' I know im a late comer to this website, so i try to avoid making comments on previous videos. But i couldnt pass on this one. I have watched all the videos posted on this site, and i have to say this is one of the most hilarious and downright shocking debates i have ever seen! I'm still trying to figure out what the problem is with Nadir. Not only can he not focus on what the topic and the challenges White offers him, but he keeps bring up the same argument over and over again. It was more of an entertainment watching the debate from Nadirs side. He was really funny and at times i felt embarrassed for him. I can now understand why ppl are refusing to debate him. WOW! just wow! I'll keep on praying for him cuz Jesus is the only one that can clarify his confused brain. He seems very very lost.

Does Matthew 27:52, 53 mean that at the time of Jesus’ death some persons in the grave were resurrected?

Many Bible commentators feel that this is what these verses mean. Yet scholars admit that the sense and proper translation of these verses is unusually difficult. Actually, there are reasons to believe that these verses mean that when Jesus died the accompanying earthquake broke open tombs near Jerusalem and thus exposed corpses to passersby.

Matthew 27:52, 53 says that “the tombs also were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised, and coming out of the tombs after his resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared to many.”—Common Bible.

But if a resurrection occurred when Jesus died, as this and other translations suggest, would the resurrected ones have waited until after Jesus’ own resurrection, on the third day after this, before leaving their tombs? Why would God resurrect such “saints” or “holy ones” at this time, since Jesus was to be “the firstborn from the dead”? (Col. 1:18; 1 Cor. 15:20) Also, it was during Christ’s future presence that anointed Christians or “holy ones” were to share in the first resurrection.—1 Thess. 3:13; 4:14-17; Rev. 20:5, 6.

Observe that, strictly speaking, the account does not say that the “bodies” came to life. It merely says that they were raised up or thrown out of the tombs by the earthquake. A similar thing happened in the town of Sonson in Colombia in 1962. El Tiempo (July 31, 1962) reported: “Two hundred corpses in the cemetery of this town were thrown out of their tombs by the violent earth tremor.” Persons passing by or through that cemetery saw the corpses, and, as a result, many of the people in Sonson had to go out and rebury their dead relatives.

Without wresting the Greek grammar, a translator can render Matthew 27:52, 53 in a way that suggests that a similar exposing of corpses resulted from the earthquake occurring at Jesus’ death. Thus the translation by Johannes Greber (1937) renders these verses: “Tombs were laid open, and many bodies of those buried there were tossed upright. In this posture they projected from the graves and were seen by many who passed by the place on their way back to the city.”—Compare the New World Translation.

Along with the rending of the temple curtain separating the Holy from the Most Holy, this violent earthquake, which exposed corpses that were soon seen by travelers who brought the news into Jerusalem, served as additional proof that Jesus was no mere criminal executed for wrongdoing. He was the Messiah and the one who would shortly be the firstborn from the dead destined for heavenly life.

"And again, we read in books such as Psalm 91 and Psalm 116 and 118, which are linked to Jesus Christ in the New Testament about him WILL BE SAVED FROM DEATH AND CRUCIFIXION:"

Not really, since God's greatest gift to us is the ransom sacrifice of his Son, Jesus Christ. (Matt 20:28) It is His means to deliver, or save, humankind from sin and death. (Eph 1:7)

Let's consider what happened when Adam was created: God gave him something truly precious—perfect human life. Made with a perfect body and mind, he would never get sick, grow old, or die. As a perfect human, he had a special relationship with God. The Bible says that Adam was a “son of God.” (Luke 3:38) was made “in God’s image” (Genesis 1:27) meaning that Adam was created with qualities like those of God, including love, wisdom, justice, and power. Yet clearly, when Adam disobeyed God and was condemned to death, he paid a very high price. His sin cost him his perfect human life with all its blessings. Sadly, Adam lost this precious life not only for himself but also for his future offspring. God’s Word says: “Through one man [Adam] sin entered into the world and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men because they had all sinned.” (Romans 5:12) Yes, all of us have inherited sin from Adam.

Hence, the Bible says that he “sold” himself and his offspring into slavery to sin and death. (Romans 7:14)

God came to mankind’s rescue by means of the ransom. Now, the idea of a ransom basically involves two things. First, a ransom is the price paid to bring about a release or to buy something back. It might be compared to the price paid for the release of a prisoner of war. Second, a ransom is the price that covers, or pays, the cost of something.

How would it be possible to cover the enormous loss that Adam inflicted on all of us and to release us from slavery to sin and death? Since a perfect human life was lost, no imperfect human life could ever buy it back. (Psalm 49:7,8) What was needed was a ransom equal in value to what was lost. This is in harmony with the principle of perfect justice found in God’s Word, which says: “Soul will be for soul.” (Deuteronomy 19:21) So, what would cover the value of the perfect human soul, or life, that Adam lost? Another perfect human life was the “corresponding ransom” that was required.—1 Timothy 2:6.

God sent the one most precious to him, his only-begotten Son. (1 John 4:9, 10) Willingly, this Son left his heavenly home, and by means of God’s holy spirit, Jesus was born as a perfect human and was not under the penalty of sin.—Luke 1:35.

Adam lost the possession of perfect human life when he sinned, hence, he could not pass it on to his offspring. Instead, he could pass on only sin and death. Jesus, whom the Bible calls “the last Adam,” had a perfect human life, and he never sinned. (1Cor 15:45) In a sense, Jesus stepped into Adam’s place in order to save us. By sacrificing, or giving up, his perfect life in flawless obedience to God, Jesus paid the price for Adam’s sin. Jesus thus brought hope to Adam’s offspring.—Rom 5:19, 1Cor 15:21, 22.

I just wanted to address the issue of the other ressurrections as told in Matthew 27. I know this is a response to an old comment but I feel as no one else has really addressed it, I would like to.

Let's start by examing the text itself:

Then, behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom; and the earth quaked, and the rocks were split, and the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; and coming out of the graves after His resurrection, they went into the holy city and appeared to many. Matthew 27:51-53

Now one thing I'd have to note very early on is that this text cannot really be talking about dead bodies simply falling out of their tombs and being seen by people.

We're also told that the ressurections themselves did not actually occur until after Jesus rose from the dead. This is very important to note. The tombs may have been opened by the quake, but the people themselves didn't rise until later.

Also, we must take note that in Mark 15:33 we are told:

Now when the sixth hour had come, there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour.

So in other words, the entire land was covered in darkness around the time that this quake would have happened.

We then have to ask, did anyone actually witness the tombs being opened unless they happened to be right by said tombs?

Granted, the text does say there was darkness "until the ninth hour" but considering we're told Jesus also died at the ninth hour, this doesn't necessarily mean that as soon as the clock hit the ninth hour that the darkness lifted.

Now, in verse 53 we read:

and coming out of the graves after His resurrection, they went into the holy city and appeared to many.

So we know from this that it couldn't simply be dead bodies that were raised out of tombs and bounced into the city of Jerusalem. These were people who were raised from the dead, who walked into the city and appeared to many.

Now here's a question. Someone comes up to you on the street in tattered clothing and covered in dirt or dust. Would you immediately assume this person has just been raised from the dead?

How would anyone know who the resurrected were?

Jesus' disciples knew Jesus was raised because they knew He had died, His tomb was found empty and because they knew Jesus before He died. Here is the key.

It would only be known to any that the dead had raised if relatives of said dead who knew them saw them.

Also, bear in mind something that happened right after Jesus' resurrection:

Now while they were going, behold, some of the guard came into the city and reported to the chief priests all the things that had happened. When they had assembled with the elders and consulted together, they gave a large sum of money to the soldiers, saying, “Tell them, ‘His disciples came at night and stole Him away while we slept.’ And if this comes to the governor’s ears, we will appease him and make you secure.” So they took the money and did as they were instructed; and this saying is commonly reported among the Jews until this day. Matthew 28:11-15

Now, look at what happened here. The religious authorities bribed the soldiers into keeping quiet about what had happened to Jesus' body.

If they were so shrewd as to try and cover up the resurrection of Jesus, do you think they wouldn't try and cover up the resurrection of others if indeed these things had occured?

I just wanted to address the issue of the other resurrections as told in Matthew 27. I know this is a response to an old comment but I feel as no one else has really addressed it, I would like to.

Let's start by examining the text itself:

Then, behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom; and the earth quaked, and the rocks were split, and the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; and coming out of the graves after His resurrection, they went into the holy city and appeared to many. Matthew 27:51-53

Now one thing I'd have to note very early on is that this text cannot really be talking about dead bodies simply falling out of their tombs and being seen by people.

We're also told that the resurrections themselves did not actually occur until after Jesus rose from the dead. This is very important to note. The tombs may have been opened by the quake, but the people themselves didn't rise until later.

Also, we must take note that in Mark 15:33 we are told:

Now when the sixth hour had come, there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour.

So in other words, the entire land was covered in darkness around the time that this quake would have happened.

We then have to ask, did anyone actually witness the tombs being opened unless they happened to be right by said tombs?

Granted, the text does say there was darkness "until the ninth hour" but considering we're told Jesus also died at the ninth hour, this doesn't necessarily mean that as soon as the clock hit the ninth hour that the darkness lifted.

Now, in verse 53 we read:

and coming out of the graves after His resurrection, they went into the holy city and appeared to many.

So we know from this that it couldn't simply be dead bodies that were raised out of tombs and bounced into the city of Jerusalem. These were people who were raised from the dead, who walked into the city and appeared to many.

Now here's a question. Someone comes up to you on the street in tattered clothing and covered in dirt or dust. Would you immediately assume this person has just been raised from the dead? How would you know unless they or someone else told you?

How would anyone know who the resurrected were?

Jesus' disciples knew Jesus was raised because they knew He had died, His tomb was found empty and because they knew Jesus before He died. Here is the key.

It would only be known to any that the dead had raised if relatives of said dead who knew them saw them.

Also, bear in mind something that happened right after Jesus' resurrection:

Now while they were going, behold, some of the guard came into the city and reported to the chief priests all the things that had happened. When they had assembled with the elders and consulted together, they gave a large sum of money to the soldiers, saying, “Tell them, ‘His disciples came at night and stole Him away while we slept.’ And if this comes to the governor’s ears, we will appease him and make you secure.” So they took the money and did as they were instructed; and this saying is commonly reported among the Jews until this day. Matthew 28:11-15

Now, look at what happened here. The religious authorities bribed the soldiers into keeping quiet about what had happened to Jesus.

If they were so shrewd as to try and cover up the resurrection of Jesus, do you think they wouldn't try and cover up the resurrection of others if indeed these things had occurred? Especially if they gave credence to Jesus’ resurrection?Ignoring one missing body is one thing, but hundreds? Possibly thousands?

And look also what the authorities tried to do the previous time someone had been raised on account of Jesus:

Now a great many of the Jews knew that He was there; and they came, not for Jesus’ sake only, but that they might also see Lazarus, whom He had raised from the dead. 10 But the chief priests plotted to put Lazarus to death also, 11 because on account of him many of the Jews went away and believed in Jesus. John 12:9-11

Let's also remember that this is not the 21st Century we're talking bout, it's 1st Century Israel. There was no internet, no blogs, no newspapers. Not everyone knew how to write and indeed, oral transmission was favoured higher than the written word at this time.

If most of these raised people would have been seen by average people or not even recognised at all, would we expect written accounts from them?

If they were seen by Roman soldiers who may have been bribed into secrecy, would we expect written accounts from them?

If any other nations were present, would we expect any different for them from the average Jew present? Would they even have known such people had been raised?

I don't think so.

However, let's also think about the first audiences who would have heard this account. They would be contemporaries of eye-witnesses and in other scriptures, readers of this time were challenged to go and seek these eye-witnesses if they had doubts. They didn't need written records, the witnesses were right there!

Also bear in mind that if these people were raised with Jesus, it's likely they ascended with Him too and now dwell in Paradise.

Oh, just wanted to add this as I don't think I addressed this particular question:

"How come the Christian historical writers and documentations do not record THIS MONUMENTAL AND MIRACULOUS event of 100s of deads supposedly resurrecting and living among the people in Palestine when Jesus was crucified? Why is history VIRTUALLY SILENT about this event if it wasn't indeed false?"

This event is recorded in the book of Matthew...a Historical Christian Document.

As a historical document, I can assure you, history is not silent.

If you wish to debate whether this is indeed a historical document, by all means present your case for what logically justifiable reasons one would have for rejecting the historicity of the book of Matthew.

Also, an argument from silence or omission is not really an argument at all. The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence (and by "evidence" here, I mean sources other than Matthew if indeed there is even an absence)

This was painful to watch --- James White clearly won --- Muslims talking in circles as they do at times. The gospels he wanted to prove his point with are not written by the apostles in the 1st century --- that is evidence enough for me to NOT use them as viable ---- the New Testament of Muhammad's time was the same as it is now --- no changes.And as far as "hiding" gospels -- is that not what Muslims do with the Koran ? or just ignore parts entirely because it proves the Koran and Muhammad are inconsistant ???

nice of nadir to contradict himself.. when he said during the Q&A "we dont know when these books (new testament) was written".. then later goes on to say how they was written 150 years to 250 years after jesus, just how would he know that..

Hey David. Can you link to my website on "Recommended Sites"? I too run an apologetics ministry, and it mostly deals with atheism, Islam, and Roman Catholicism. If you are weary about if it's even worth linking too, just check it out. http://godinscience.webs.com/

I'm sorry to tell you that you have failed to answer even the simplest question presented to you. I really recommend that you spend some efforts and study Islam and the Quran.

Also, I wanted to correct what you have stated in this debate that the Quran said that the Christians have corrupted their book.. Unfortunately, you didn't say the truth here. I'm asking you to put the tafseer to that verse you used. the tafseer says that the Christians have corrupted the meaning of the bible and didn't corrupt the wordings. in the tafseer it was written

تحريف التأويل وليس الحرف

so, you didn't say the truth at all. Also, I want to refer you to a great number of the Islamic scholars who stated that "nobody could alter or corrupt the books of God including the torah and Injeel, but rather corrupting the meaning" .. means that the wording stayed the same but only the interpretations (Tafaseer) were corrupted..

I can present you with all the tafaseer you want and challenge you to prove me wrong.

FAQ Page

On this website, we engage Muslims and the foundations of Islam without trying to be "PC". We feel honesty is better than disguised language. As you can read on our FAQ, this is out of love, not out of hatred. Thanks, and we're looking forward to seeing your comments!